YA: At the end of trial within a trial I had ruled the toothbrush, the Good Morning towel and plastic bottle and evidence related to those items especially on the evidence relating to the DNA analysis conducted on those items could not be tendered as evidence. There was no doubt even at that time those evidence were relevant and admissible but I have excluded them on the ground that they were obtained through unfair means.

The decision to exclude those evidence was based on the evidence available at that time especially the evidence tendered during trial within a trial. It was made without the benefit of the evidence from the Investigating

Officer who was not called as witness in the trial within a trial. The evidence tendered in court at that time without the investigating officer tend to support the defence assertion that the accused was illegally arrested and his subsequent detention in the cell was nothing but to deploy designed to collect the DNA samples by trick.

Now in the light of the evidence adduced from the Investigating Officer and the Arresting Officer during the main trial, it is clear that the arrest of the accused are in fact lawful. His subsequent detention in the cell was indeed lawful and for a lawful purpose. Thus, the detention of the accused in the cell could not longer said to be done for the purpose of obtaining DNA evidence from him by trick as alleged by the defence.

In those circumstances, the court has no discretion but to allow those items collected from the cell and all evidence related to those items tendered as evidence. Therefore, I now ruled that those items and all evidence related to those items are admissible and could be tendered as evidence. My earlier ruling regarding this matter are accordingly reversed.

With regard to the application to compel the accused to give DNA sample, the learned DPP relied on Section 73 and Section 165 of the Evidence Act.

Section 73(2) specifically talks about directing any person who write any words or figures for the purpose to enabling the court to compare those words or figures with any word or figures to be written by that person. Section 73 (3) extended it to include finger impression.

After reading this section again and again, I find no amount of judicial creativity to justify extending this clear provision to also include DNA sample. Therefore, the application by the learned DPP to compel the accused to give his

DNA sample has to be rejected on the simple ground that there is no legal provision empowering the court to do so. That’s all.

MY: Much obliged. YA, as a matter of confirmatory I have to recall two witnesses just to tender the exhibits marked before as ID.

YA: But the exhibits can be tendered as P, kan?

MY: Yes, but I don’t want any problem to arise later because we have tendered it but for some reason they are marked as ID. I don’t have the witnesses here, YA. Can we do it tomorrow? I just want to call Aidora and Amidon.

Just to tender. Because today seems to be everything to be okay but I cannot afford any problem to arise later because there might be some challenges to it.

YA: So you cannot proceed with the case today because you don’t have those witnesses?

MY: Yes, I want to call the witnesses. After that I think it will take me about 20 minutes for both witnesses. And then I will close the case. Tomorrow, YA.

YA: Mr. Karpal?

KS: I have to be in the Court of Appeal in the morning. But that’s alright.

About...

It now boils down to one word – consensual. Although short, today’s trial proceedings nevertheless produced enough interest and detail to last a lifetime, or at least a political career.

The issue at hand was the difference in the charge sheet and Saiful’s testimony. The charge sheet accused Anwar of consensual sex against the order of nature, whereas his defense team argued that Saiful’s testimony spoke of non-consensual sex against the order of nature.

Their argument was so persuasive that the judge adjourned the hearing to determine whether or not to impeach the testimony of AI’s accuser.

Karpal and gang were over the moon and AI was laughing uproariously. One wonders why though? Was AI laughing too soon?

The fact is that “sex against the order of nature” is prominent in both the charge sheet and the accuser’s statements. So is the prosecution merely saying that the sex was consensual or not non-consensual as claimed by Saiful? If this is so, how does it help disprove that Anwar indulges in “sex against the order of nature”?

From sodomy to homosexuality…was Anwar laughing too soon? It’s all in the transcript. The wordings of the charge sheet and the statements are there and so are Karpal’s arguments in full. You decide – was it consensual or non-consensual.

Because obviously, you no longer have to decide if “sex against the order of nature” really took place or not.

Email Subscription

Archives

10 Ridiculously Dangerous ChemicalsBy Ben Gazur, Listverse, 9 December 2016.Although they make up almost everything around and inside us, chemicals suffer from a bad reputation. While it’s true that some chemicals can be beneficial, all chemicals can be hazardous under the right conditions. The chemicals on this list, however, are risky to be around even und […]

Assalamualaikum w.r.t.Quite a while I have not posted anything in the blog. Went to PTS raya gathering this afternoon (15/10/2009), and got a dose of adrenalin to write something. I have hyperlinked the blog to 'NASA Image of the Day' and today's image, taken from NASA's Swift satellite, is of a galaxy, known as M31 in the constellation A […]

No 1MDB to blame this time KL, Dec 7: Is there something rotten in Singapore? Repeated financial scandals and deep-set financial deviances seem to suggest a major breakdown of compliance and serious oversight in a global financial centre. Previously, they had 1MDB to conveniently blame (for cases in that actually concerned internal processes flaws, including […]

Laundering: Real Estate and ArtTheir laundering functions replicate a fund which in 1MDB’s balance sheet is deemed as investments. Once the London mansion with its swimming pool or a Picasso’s portrait of his love, Marie-Therese Walter, is sold, the proceeds typically return to a private banking account. Hoarding such kind of assets are better than […]

Dear Friends and members Clamouring for the Almighty The ‘Allah’ controversy rages on relentlessly in this beloved land of ours, wreaking havoc to the very fabric of multiethnic and multireligious Malaysia. The recent controversial Jais raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia and confiscation of the latter’s 321 copies of AlKitab only raises the already hot po […]